Yeah, true, Tennisfan. If not adjusted for inflation the list will look different…by maybe only a million dollars and change, US dollars, 2007 vs 2015. What’s a measly 1 million when your annual income million(s)?

Ok it is not money but it about records and points, somebody calculted and converted Roger’s 2006 points to today and came up with over 16k points that Nole has to make to have that record, but I found this on the other forum, so who is right?:

Using the current ATP methodology, Federer’s record is 15745 points accomplished in 2006 season:

Maybe the tx numbers are already adjusted. As I said, the whole career match winnings sounded small for Borg and McEnroe. Yeah, think the point is: they make a lot of money on and off the court no matter what year it is. But definitely the dollar isn’t what it was.

J-Kath/Margot i would think your both right??anyway i find lists like this all a bit OTT,way too much kitsch,its always the same in life the ones at the top get all the spoils,would like to see the lesser ranked players getting a better monetary share to be honest….

And Gypsy Gal is right, in my opinion. Pure capitalism is too easily twisted by the execs with the most wealth and power to reward them a disproportionate share of the returns of the business, plus a class of “star talent” they see as indispensible in driving the creation of new wealth. While treating the vast proportion of labor as replacable cogs who get the minimum pay for the maximum volume of work. And now with globalism and “open economic borders”, easily replaced by the low bid labor replacement/outsourcing pool.

Until the masses organize into unions, or simply take control of a nation and redistribute wealth. And that can be by communism, socialism, or democracies that vote and do it by the dole, entitlement, higher taxes on the rich.

Henry Ford had his faults, but he thought about industrialization as best if Ford factory workers and subcontractor labor and firms got a good days pay for a good day’s work and used that disposable wealth to visibly better society by spending and investing outside the factory. Build the paved streets, make towns and cities WANT factories. Had the goodwill gained with the people all around the factories not directly employed there to get laws created to support private enterprise. Kept redistributionist taxes and government calling the shots in industry – away from it.

In tennis, in sports in general, unions are weak or take the form of a players/bosses “council”. Or not allowed to exist at all under the sham of amateurism..where players do as they are told. Like in the American NCAA. A massively rich and powerful confederation of team owners and sports facility operators and media lawyers that don’t have to pay the talent…just compensate them with enough “free education, free prestige and fame, free meals!” Keep the athlete replacement labor pool coming in to restock the sports rosters and “win enough” to keep the big shots happy.

Pro Tennis has kept the lid on labor trouble, but the disparity of wealth has increased under the “star system”. Endorsements and disparate prize money drive that. Sharapova gets 18-20 million in endorsements plus non-taxable perks and swag, tax deductable business expenses like her own stylist and masseur, flies in private jets, while the 175th ranked player flies coach, can’t afford a full-time coach and stays with 3 other journeywoman in a Motel 6 15 miles away from the US Open.
To Federer’s credit, back when he was players president on the hybrid work-labor council – he reacted to this pressuring the ATP to agree to more early round prize money, and forcing the rich Slam owners and broadcast media to allocate more revenue sharing to lower tier players, judging officials, support staff. But obviously no intent to do any revenue sharing from his starpower endorsement deals.

Still an ongoing problem in both men’s and women’s pro tennis. It cannot exist indefinitely as a viable sport if 1% of the top dogs players and “suits” – get 70% of the revenue. Promising new talent may drop out of the Tour, just can’t afford it. Rising players trying to get a quality coach to go on the road with them have increasing difficulty competing on a level playing field against established Stars with lavish support Teams of 10-15 people.

Tennis should always keep in mind Henry Ford. Who paid 5 dollars and hour when he could have gotten away with 2.50 an hour – because he wanted workers and all the people they spread their disposable dollar income to via the money multiplier – to buy his cars and have goodwill to his enterprise and not pass laws to screw old Henry.

Madmax – Money made is an obvious metric to assess players by, because they are PROFESSIONAL players out TO MAKE MONEY!
But a flawed metric if sums made are not inflation adjusted and do not account for global tennis attracting major money sponsors since the early 80s and organizers doing more revenue sharing.
And just talking “prize money” overlooks all other significant revenue streams flowing to players. Beginning with endorsements which far exceed prize money for the top players. Add ATP subsidized employee perks, appearance fees, funding of national tennis organizations often given large money sums by government or by corporations to develop and sometimes compensate players, especially “promising new talent”.

The USTA throws huge money out there for the Tiafoes, MIchael Russell, Williams Sistas, Sloane Stephens, Taylor Townsend -sorts of players with financial need. Plus money for players like Madison Keys and Christina McHale with no need. And funds US players like Isner, Baker , etc leaving NCAA land to try and transition to being pro players.

Add in appearance fees. And lucrative exhibitions. And some “meet and greets”. And SWAG. As in goodies that don’t come from endorsers, but are given gratis by firms for product placement in the hopes that a powerful politician, a celeb, a globally known tennis player (inc famous retired ones) Who will be seen in photos sporting their new iPhone, free Addidas shoes, their 800 dollar evening dress..Or eating from a free sushi platter in a players lounge or Hollywood backstage or White House soiree for the rich and powerful.

Some nations give tax breaks. Which is in effect a subsidy.

To me money is hard to put a solid figure on. Some revenue is murky, like appearance fees.

Prize money doesn’t begin to tell how much money a pro is making in tennis. Not with all the other revenue sources not factored in…Prize money also varies event by event of comparable points and difficulty.

**********

I think a better number to go with if you want to look at just performance is points adjusted and normed over time. With notation of points totals since the 70s changing over time as events are added or dropped (but not transferred from say Hamburg to Shanghai).

I think a better number to go with if you want to look at just performance is points adjusted and normed over time. With notation of points totals since the 70s changing over time as events are added or dropped (but not transferred from say Hamburg to Shanghai).

October 24th, 2015 at 1:44 pm

Yes ChrisF1, just money, money, money – and it is so much more than that.